Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
Again - let's say there are 9 things that McCain did that were "negative" or had negative connotation for his campaign, and 1 thing that Obama did . . . would you thus be upset with a 3:1 ratio of good:bad stories?
You're simply not allowing for context here - it seems pretty clear that things like Palin's gaffes (real or perceived) were more pressing than anything the Obama/Biden camp did, and much more timely. Ayers got a lot of press time, but it happened years ago - it wasn't an ongoing story.
I guess I just don't see how you've proven any imbalance that can't be explained away by mitigating factors.
|
And I can't see how you aren't defining mitigating factors as anything that might justify the imbalance.
Think about the nutty stuff Biden said. How was it less pressing than what Palin said?